|  | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | rikitikitaviguy  | | Posted: | Oct 5, 2011 11:29 | | Subject: | Re: Box condition should remai "New or Used" | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| Then that should apply TO ANYTHING that isn't sealed...not just boxes Rob...I
vote no...
LM
In Suggestions, Master_Jedi_Rob writes:
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | Rob_and_Shelagh | | Posted: | Oct 5, 2011 11:31 | | Subject: | Re: Box condition should remai "New or Used" | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, rikitikitaviguy writes:
| | Then that should apply TO ANYTHING that isn't sealed...not just boxes Rob...I
vote no...
LM
|
Bricks do not have seals 
| |
In Suggestions, Master_Jedi_Rob writes:
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | rikitikitaviguy | | Posted: | Oct 5, 2011 11:45 | | Subject: | Re: Box condition should remai "New or Used" | | Viewed: | 28 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| Ummmm...yes, Robert, they do....
Many sets have bricks SEALED IN BAGGIES.....
LM
In Suggestions, Rob_and_Shelagh writes:
| | In Suggestions, rikitikitaviguy writes:
| | Then that should apply TO ANYTHING that isn't sealed...not just boxes Rob...I
vote no...
LM
|
Bricks do not have seals
| |
In Suggestions, Master_Jedi_Rob writes:
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | Rob_and_Shelagh | | Posted: | Oct 5, 2011 11:52 | | Subject: | Re: Box condition should remai "New or Used" | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, rikitikitaviguy writes:
| | Ummmm...yes, Robert, they do....
Many sets have bricks SEALED IN BAGGIES.....
LM
|
You mean the bags have seals or are sealed? Yes, I agree. The bricks themselves
ummmmm, no, they don't.........
Are you now going so say you want to sell the ripped open bags as new because
they were only ripped open once?
box: refers to the carboard thing that is used as packaging for the set, along
with those bags.
bricks: refers to the actual product you take out of it.
You can take a product out of a box without using it but you can't use a box
as packaging, seal it up, open it, etc. without using it.
Robert
| |
In Suggestions, Rob_and_Shelagh writes:
| | In Suggestions, rikitikitaviguy writes:
| | Then that should apply TO ANYTHING that isn't sealed...not just boxes Rob...I
vote no...
LM
|
Bricks do not have seals
| |
In Suggestions, Master_Jedi_Rob writes:
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | dvsntt | | Posted: | Oct 5, 2011 11:32 | | Subject: | Re: Box condition should remai "New or Used" | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, rikitikitaviguy writes:
| | Then that should apply TO ANYTHING that isn't sealed...not just boxes Rob...I
vote no...
LM
In Suggestions, Master_Jedi_Rob writes:
|
If that were strictly the case, I would vote Yes. I feel anything that is unsealed
is not new any longer, and should be described by its actual condition.
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | dvsntt | | Posted: | Oct 5, 2011 11:34 | | Subject: | Re: Box condition should remai "New or Used" | | Viewed: | 25 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, dvsntt writes:
| | In Suggestions, rikitikitaviguy writes:
| | Then that should apply TO ANYTHING that isn't sealed...not just boxes Rob...I
vote no...
LM
In Suggestions, Master_Jedi_Rob writes:
|
If that were strictly the case, I would vote Yes. I feel anything that is unsealed
is not new any longer, and should be described by its actual condition.
|
and further, I also feel if one is not purchasing parts or sets directly from
a licensed LEGO retailer, or an authorized LEGO distributor, that it is being
purchased second-hand, and not being bought "New".
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | JediRob | | Posted: | Oct 5, 2011 11:36 | | Subject: | Re: Box condition should remai "New or Used" | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, dvsntt writes:
| | In Suggestions, rikitikitaviguy writes:
| | Then that should apply TO ANYTHING that isn't sealed...not just boxes Rob...I
vote no...
LM
In Suggestions, Master_Jedi_Rob writes:
|
If that were strictly the case, I would vote Yes. I feel anything that is unsealed
is not new any longer, and should be described by its actual condition.
|
So you vote "No" here
and "Yes" to both of these
Modify the definition":
http://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=580812
The Definition should be "Used" only, unless straight from the printer: http://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=580814
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | rikitikitaviguy | | Posted: | Oct 5, 2011 11:43 | | Subject: | Re: Box condition should remai "New or Used" | | Viewed: | 27 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| I have NOT voted one way or the other on your links...I have ONLY replied to
THIS posting...ironically it was not the box CONDITION that rohnny, the OP, was
asking about...it was that the buyer was upset because he/she claimed to have
not received a set when according to rohnny and his description, he listed ONLY
A BOX for sale...regardless of used or new.
But, to continue this "hyjacked" thread....
Again....you need to use the same mentality, semantics, or whatever to apply
to the pieces being removed from their respective 'baggies' or boxes as you would
to the boxes themselves....because a buyer can NOT know if the pieces, being
removed from either a LEGO sealed 'baggie' or 'box' have ever been put together....hence
'used' according to what you have been posting...
How far will this be taken? What definitions will need to be changed? Because
CLEARLY, you can not just amend definitions to what a 'used'/'new' box would
be...ANY LEGO part....
LM
In Suggestions, Master_Jedi_Rob writes:
| | In Suggestions, dvsntt writes:
| | In Suggestions, rikitikitaviguy writes:
| | Then that should apply TO ANYTHING that isn't sealed...not just boxes Rob...I
vote no...
LM
In Suggestions, Master_Jedi_Rob writes:
|
If that were strictly the case, I would vote Yes. I feel anything that is unsealed
is not new any longer, and should be described by its actual condition.
|
So you vote "No" here
and "Yes" to both of these
Modify the definition":
http://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=580812
The Definition should be "Used" only, unless straight from the printer: http://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=580814
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | JediRob | | Posted: | Oct 5, 2011 11:46 | | Subject: | Re: Box condition should remai "New or Used" | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, rikitikitaviguy writes:
| |
But, to continue this "hyjacked" thread....
|
There is a reason I made new posts with appropriate room for discussion and
voting seperate from Rohnny's... (this is that thread, not the Hijacked
one)
-R
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | rikitikitaviguy | | Posted: | Oct 5, 2011 11:49 | | Subject: | Re: Box condition should remai "New or Used" | | Viewed: | 28 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| But your title is limiting to just boxes....hence the reason for me disagreeing....
Sorry I did not give you kudos for starting a new thread...
On another note-look at Gary's response...what about early items and those that
go up easily through the 1970's where there was NEVER a seal? Now what Rob?
LM
In Suggestions, Master_Jedi_Rob writes:
| | In Suggestions, rikitikitaviguy writes:
| |
But, to continue this "hyjacked" thread....
|
There is a reason I made new posts with appropriate room for discussion and
voting seperate from Rohnny's... (this is that thread, not the Hijacked
one)
-R
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | dvsntt | | Posted: | Oct 5, 2011 11:52 | | Subject: | Re: Box condition should remai "New or Used" | | Viewed: | 28 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, rikitikitaviguy writes:
| | But your title is limiting to just boxes....hence the reason for me disagreeing....
Sorry I did not give you kudos for starting a new thread...
On another note-look at Gary's response...what about early items and those that
go up easily through the 1970's where there was NEVER a seal? Now what Rob?
LM
In Suggestions, Master_Jedi_Rob writes:
| | In Suggestions, rikitikitaviguy writes:
| |
But, to continue this "hyjacked" thread....
|
There is a reason I made new posts with appropriate room for discussion and
voting seperate from Rohnny's... (this is that thread, not the Hijacked
one)
-R
|
|
My proposal is still to describe it by its "actual" condition and not an ambiguous
one.
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | rikitikitaviguy | | Posted: | Oct 5, 2011 11:59 | | Subject: | Re: Box condition should remai "New or Used" | | Viewed: | 24 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| ...and I agree with THAT suggestion...
Even better? (but OBVIOUSLY time consuming)...take a picture of all!!!! (tells
a 1,000 words no?)
LM
In Suggestions, dvsntt writes:
| | In Suggestions, rikitikitaviguy writes:
| | But your title is limiting to just boxes....hence the reason for me disagreeing....
Sorry I did not give you kudos for starting a new thread...
On another note-look at Gary's response...what about early items and those that
go up easily through the 1970's where there was NEVER a seal? Now what Rob?
LM
In Suggestions, Master_Jedi_Rob writes:
| | In Suggestions, rikitikitaviguy writes:
| |
But, to continue this "hyjacked" thread....
|
There is a reason I made new posts with appropriate room for discussion and
voting seperate from Rohnny's... (this is that thread, not the Hijacked
one)
-R
|
|
My proposal is still to describe it by its "actual" condition and not an ambiguous
one.
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | dvsntt | | Posted: | Oct 5, 2011 12:13 | | Subject: | Re: Box condition should remai "New or Used" | | Viewed: | 24 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, rikitikitaviguy writes:
| | ...and I agree with THAT suggestion...
Even better? (but OBVIOUSLY time consuming)...take a picture of all!!!! (tells
a 1,000 words no?)
LM
In Suggestions, dvsntt writes:
| | In Suggestions, rikitikitaviguy writes:
| | But your title is limiting to just boxes....hence the reason for me disagreeing....
Sorry I did not give you kudos for starting a new thread...
On another note-look at Gary's response...what about early items and those that
go up easily through the 1970's where there was NEVER a seal? Now what Rob?
LM
|
|
|
Yes, a picture is even better. When I first started on BL, I began by listing
all of my old instruction booklets and photographing each one. But as you clearly
know, It was soon evident the time consumption of this task was counter-productive
to the ability of listing items quickly and profitably. But a small description
(very good condition, no creases or folds, print is excellent) or (Good condition
with wear on edges, and crease at top) I find sufficient.
| | | | | | In Suggestions, Master_Jedi_Rob writes:
| | In Suggestions, rikitikitaviguy writes:
| |
But, to continue this "hyjacked" thread....
|
There is a reason I made new posts with appropriate room for discussion and
voting seperate from Rohnny's... (this is that thread, not the Hijacked
one)
-R
|
|
My proposal is still to describe it by its "actual" condition and not an ambiguous
one.
|
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | istokg | | Posted: | Oct 5, 2011 12:18 | | Subject: | Re: Box condition should remai "New or Used" | | Viewed: | 43 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| LM,
You and I look at this topic from a collectors point of view...
Therein lies the problem...
I want to see Bricklink get closer to the collectibles norm, and not farther
away from it.
What does this suggestion bode for the MIB (versus MISB) scenario? Does this
imply that MIB is not a valid term?
How does one justify opening a box, and not the baggies inside? Does the box
become used, while the parts remain new? That would very much complicate the
MIB (versus MISB) description, rather than make it simpler.
Do we eliminate the NEW box category? IMHO that will further remove Bricklink
from the norm of collectibles descriptions, and perhaps cause an uptick in disputes.
And speaking of disputes. The original scenario behind this entire series of
posts was NOT condition related, but because a buyer bought what he (mistakenly)
thought was more than an empty box.
What about future Paypal disputes based on CONDITION? Paypal doesn't care what
decisions are made here on Bricklink as far as conditions go... they follow the
collectibles norm... and the more we (Bricklink) get away from that norm... the
more Paypal disputes will be decided against us. Is that what we want?
I don't like the fact that bricks are not graded by condition. Bricklink lets
that slide because of volume of parts sold here... and I can understand that.
But lets not get farther away from the collectibles norm than we already are.
All it will do is get us into trouble when Paypal disputes are opened that are
related to condition.
The whole "opened vs unopened" = "NEW vs USED" discussion is vastly more complex
than a simple up/down vote, especially when dealing with the fickle 60+ years
of LEGO history.
Just my 2 cents...
Gary Istok
In Suggestions, rikitikitaviguy writes:
| | ...and I agree with THAT suggestion...
Even better? (but OBVIOUSLY time consuming)...take a picture of all!!!! (tells
a 1,000 words no?)
LM
In Suggestions, dvsntt writes:
| | In Suggestions, rikitikitaviguy writes:
| | But your title is limiting to just boxes....hence the reason for me disagreeing....
Sorry I did not give you kudos for starting a new thread...
On another note-look at Gary's response...what about early items and those that
go up easily through the 1970's where there was NEVER a seal? Now what Rob?
LM
In Suggestions, Master_Jedi_Rob writes:
| | In Suggestions, rikitikitaviguy writes:
| |
But, to continue this "hyjacked" thread....
|
There is a reason I made new posts with appropriate room for discussion and
voting seperate from Rohnny's... (this is that thread, not the Hijacked
one)
-R
|
|
My proposal is still to describe it by its "actual" condition and not an ambiguous
one.
|
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | dvsntt | | Posted: | Oct 5, 2011 12:34 | | Subject: | Re: Box condition should remai "New or Used" | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| Gary,
With all due respect, you are on of my most admired LEGO enthusiasts and I could
hardly have conceived of anything LEGO related that I would be in dispute with
you. But, I do no think eliminating "New" and "Used" detracts from the collectible
market. In fact, I think it enhances that side of the hobby.
I would probably also be considered to be on the collectible side of LEGO over
the business or hobby side. Though there is a bit of overlap.
I look at LEGO sets, pieces, boxes, booklets, etc...in much the same way I do
with my more traditional collectibles; comic books, star wars figures, rare books,
and vintage playing cards.
-Nothing is new unless it was bought firsthand from a retailer or distributor.
-If I re-sell an item, no matter how pristine I've cared for it, it is being
sold second-hand, and is not new and can never be again.
-Everything can be graded(condition) on its quality; I.E. the registration and
symmetry of the print, the sharpness of the edges, the flexibility of the flat
edges, the alignment and symmetry of the factory seals, etc...
-But you don't have to be that spcific, it is well enough to describe something
"Like new, all factory seals in tact, minor edge wear, graphics clear and sharp"
In Suggestions, istokg writes:
| | LM,
You and I look at this topic from a collectors point of view...
Therein lies the problem...
I want to see Bricklink get closer to the collectibles norm, and not farther
away from it.
What does this suggestion bode for the MIB (versus MISB) scenario? Does this
imply that MIB is not a valid term?
How does one justify opening a box, and not the baggies inside? Does the box
become used, while the parts remain new? That would very much complicate the
MIB (versus MISB) description, rather than make it simpler.
Do we eliminate the NEW box category? IMHO that will further remove Bricklink
from the norm of collectibles descriptions, and perhaps cause an uptick in disputes.
And speaking of disputes. The original scenario behind this entire series of
posts was NOT condition related, but because a buyer bought what he (mistakenly)
thought was more than an empty box.
What about future Paypal disputes based on CONDITION? Paypal doesn't care what
decisions are made here on Bricklink as far as conditions go... they follow the
collectibles norm... and the more we (Bricklink) get away from that norm... the
more Paypal disputes will be decided against us. Is that what we want?
I don't like the fact that bricks are not graded by condition. Bricklink lets
that slide because of volume of parts sold here... and I can understand that.
But lets not get farther away from the collectibles norm than we already are.
All it will do is get us into trouble when Paypal disputes are opened that are
related to condition.
The whole "opened vs unopened" = "NEW vs USED" discussion is vastly more complex
than a simple up/down vote, especially when dealing with the fickle 60+ years
of LEGO history.
Just my 2 cents...
Gary Istok
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | rikitikitaviguy | | Posted: | Oct 5, 2011 14:14 | | Subject: | Re: Box condition should remai "New or Used" | | Viewed: | 28 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| Well said my friend.
LM
In Suggestions, istokg writes:
| | LM,
You and I look at this topic from a collectors point of view...
Therein lies the problem...
I want to see Bricklink get closer to the collectibles norm, and not farther
away from it.
What does this suggestion bode for the MIB (versus MISB) scenario? Does this
imply that MIB is not a valid term?
How does one justify opening a box, and not the baggies inside? Does the box
become used, while the parts remain new? That would very much complicate the
MIB (versus MISB) description, rather than make it simpler.
Do we eliminate the NEW box category? IMHO that will further remove Bricklink
from the norm of collectibles descriptions, and perhaps cause an uptick in disputes.
And speaking of disputes. The original scenario behind this entire series of
posts was NOT condition related, but because a buyer bought what he (mistakenly)
thought was more than an empty box.
What about future Paypal disputes based on CONDITION? Paypal doesn't care what
decisions are made here on Bricklink as far as conditions go... they follow the
collectibles norm... and the more we (Bricklink) get away from that norm... the
more Paypal disputes will be decided against us. Is that what we want?
I don't like the fact that bricks are not graded by condition. Bricklink lets
that slide because of volume of parts sold here... and I can understand that.
But lets not get farther away from the collectibles norm than we already are.
All it will do is get us into trouble when Paypal disputes are opened that are
related to condition.
The whole "opened vs unopened" = "NEW vs USED" discussion is vastly more complex
than a simple up/down vote, especially when dealing with the fickle 60+ years
of LEGO history.
Just my 2 cents...
Gary Istok
In Suggestions, rikitikitaviguy writes:
| | ...and I agree with THAT suggestion...
Even better? (but OBVIOUSLY time consuming)...take a picture of all!!!! (tells
a 1,000 words no?)
LM
In Suggestions, dvsntt writes:
| | In Suggestions, rikitikitaviguy writes:
| | But your title is limiting to just boxes....hence the reason for me disagreeing....
Sorry I did not give you kudos for starting a new thread...
On another note-look at Gary's response...what about early items and those that
go up easily through the 1970's where there was NEVER a seal? Now what Rob?
LM
In Suggestions, Master_Jedi_Rob writes:
| | In Suggestions, rikitikitaviguy writes:
| |
But, to continue this "hyjacked" thread....
|
There is a reason I made new posts with appropriate room for discussion and
voting seperate from Rohnny's... (this is that thread, not the Hijacked
one)
-R
|
|
My proposal is still to describe it by its "actual" condition and not an ambiguous
one.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | Rob_and_Shelagh | | Posted: | Oct 5, 2011 11:43 | | Subject: | Re: Box condition should remai "New or Used" | | Viewed: | 22 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, dvsntt writes:
| | In Suggestions, rikitikitaviguy writes:
| | Then that should apply TO ANYTHING that isn't sealed...not just boxes Rob...I
vote no...
LM
In Suggestions, Master_Jedi_Rob writes:
|
If that were strictly the case, I would vote Yes. I feel anything that is unsealed
is not new any longer, and should be described by its actual condition.
|
Indeed.
To those who descrbe a box as new if it has been assembled, glued, filled with
lego, sealed, shipped, sold, seals cut open, contents taken out, etc... A simple
question for you: What is the definition of a used box? Remember new/used on
BL is not (currently, this is another discussion) about the "condition" of a
box which is really what determines what someone will pay for it. Condition should
be stated in the description if there are any defects (irrespective of if the
box is classed and "new" or "used"). The easiset solution to this (IMO) pointless
debate is to just remove the new/used classification for boxes altogether and
have sellers describe their condition.
Robert
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | mnoel2 | | Posted: | Oct 5, 2011 11:55 | | Subject: | Re: Box condition should remai "New or Used" | | Viewed: | 24 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| | | To those who descrbe a box as new if it has been assembled, glued, filled with
lego, sealed, shipped, sold, seals cut open, contents taken out, etc... A simple
question for you: What is the definition of a used box? Remember new/used on
BL is not (currently, this is another discussion) about the "condition" of a
box which is really what determines what someone will pay for it. Condition should
be stated in the description if there are any defects (irrespective of if the
box is classed and "new" or "used"). The easiset solution to this (IMO) pointless
debate is to just remove the new/used classification for boxes altogether and
have sellers describe their condition.
Robert
|
I belive this is the best solution that I have read yet. Straight, to the point,
easy to decipher.
Well done.
~Mark
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | legoman77 | | Posted: | Oct 5, 2011 12:37 | | Subject: | Re: Box condition should remai "New or Used" | | Viewed: | 27 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Master_Jedi_Rob writes:
Someone pointed this out by PM to me:
what it comes down to is if you have to cut tape on the box, or
rip glue or tape off it to open the box, this clearly makes the box used.
the very fact of the tape or glue which is very much part of the box when shipped
from LEGO makes them part of the condition, if they are damaged or removed it
effects the condition of the box.
put it this way if you took the clothes off of Barbie, can they be considered
new?
good points
John P
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | rikitikitaviguy | | Posted: | Oct 5, 2011 14:21 | | Subject: | Re: Box condition should remai "New or Used" | | Viewed: | 22 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| OK...following your reasoning...
If you took Barbie out of the box then she is USED...(sorry John)...you 'handled'
her but did not 'build' with her....how can we know for sure? 
So she must be listed as used....according to all this banter here!
LM
In Suggestions, legoman77 writes:
| | In Suggestions, Master_Jedi_Rob writes:
Someone pointed this out by PM to me:
what it comes down to is if you have to cut tape on the box, or
rip glue or tape off it to open the box, this clearly makes the box used.
the very fact of the tape or glue which is very much part of the box when shipped
from LEGO makes them part of the condition, if they are damaged or removed it
effects the condition of the box.
put it this way if you took the clothes off of Barbie, can they be considered
new?
good points
John P
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | kzinti | | Posted: | Oct 5, 2011 14:23 | | Subject: | Re: Box condition should remai "New or Used" | | Viewed: | 16 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, rikitikitaviguy writes:
| | OK...following your reasoning...
If you took Barbie out of the box then she is USED...(sorry John)...you 'handled'
her but did not 'build' with her....how can we know for sure?
So she must be listed as used....according to all this banter here!
LM
In Suggestions, legoman77 writes:
| | In Suggestions, Master_Jedi_Rob writes:
Someone pointed this out by PM to me:
what it comes down to is if you have to cut tape on the box, or
rip glue or tape off it to open the box, this clearly makes the box used.
the very fact of the tape or glue which is very much part of the box when shipped
from LEGO makes them part of the condition, if they are damaged or removed it
effects the condition of the box.
put it this way if you took the clothes off of Barbie, can they be considered
new?
good points
John P
|
|
Well, if John handled Barbie, she would definitely have been Used... *snicker*
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | legoman77 | | Posted: | Oct 5, 2011 14:28 | | Subject: | Re: Box condition should remai "New or Used" | | Viewed: | 21 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, rikitikitaviguy writes:
| | OK...following your reasoning...
If you took Barbie out of the box then she is USED...(sorry John)...you 'handled'
her but did not 'build' with her....how can we know for sure?
So she must be listed as used....according to all this banter here!
LM
|
For sure, used. Just like my little display of Barbies from the "wrong side
of the tracks."
John P
|
|
|
|
|
USA, Washington
United Kingdom, England
